I was trained on the M16A2 and we were taught to use the sling in two ways. It’s was always a struggle to get the same tension between shots. Thank you for the wonderful videos.
I shot a Colt Sp1 and Army M-16 in competition in the late seventies and eighties. I learned early on that the best sling tension was to go as light as possible on those rifles. I did manage to make NRA Expert with the SP1 and handloads. Six hundred yards was a royal tussle, but it could be kept inside the scoring rings.
Makes sense why CMP National Match A2s have free float tubes. Got one on my Windham Weaponry A1ish (it’s not a true A1), and it works well at letting me apply sling tension without shifting zero.
Thank you. Another excellent video. The M16 rifle was designed to kill people i.e., not rabbits or corvids; at several hundred metres. Sufficiently accurate for the former task. The lighter weight of the M16A1 was nice, compared to the SLR L1A1; but field stripping/reassembly and cleaning were all quicker and easier with the latter. The pressed metal bipod was ideal for keeping an M16 or SLR off the ground whilst having a rest, digging a shell scrape, setting up your hutchie (shelter-half) or cooking a meal, etc.
I only ever shoot a standard (SRa) No1/No4 freehand or off "supported hand", even in competitions where slings are permitted - because of the MPI change when other forms of support are used. For target (SRb) No1/No4 I zero for the one type of sling and position. Bipods on a military bolt action (ie wood bedded) are hopeless, delivering very variable MPI, but some people persist in using them and then complaining that the rifle won't hold zero.
I was confirming zero with my ps90 last year. I was in a hurry and rested the barrel on a wooden rest. I was surprised how much the shift was at 100 yards. Diving into the hasty sling shift with optic was cool too. Thanks!
I have a Colt AR15-A4 that currently has a Knight's Armament M5 RAS and topped with an ACOG 4x32. I have experienced a tremendous amount of barrel flex with this set up, especially in the Arizona summer heat. When shooting prone and resting the rifle towards the front sight post area, I can get about 6" to 8" of upward flex at 100 meters with 62 grain M855/SS109 loads. Just as you demonstrated. At 300 meters I need to use my 100 meter main sight because the 300 meter BDC sends the bullet way over the target. As a result, I've decided to free float the barrel with a Geissele Mk8 15" rail. I hope this will fix the issue. Great video.
Good video and good shooting Bloke. I'm honestly surprised the impact wasnt that big on the pencil barrel. My A2 barrel, will have enough deflection to require adjustment of the sights, especially at 600 yards, pending my shooting position or technique. Using the sling as a shooters sling with high tension really shows the barrel flex. Consistency is key when doing precision. Even my bolt action, wooden stock rifle, will have different POI pending sling tension due to recoil differences at long range, although much less pronounced than a non-floated AR.
@@BlokeontheRange I hesitated getting into ARs for a long time due to the reverse barrel taper seriously triggering my engineering OCD. getting away from government profile and HBAR is a relatively recent phenomenon.
It could be minimal barrel movement, but, at 300 I could see a small deviation in position making a potential sizable difference in point of impact. Just my two pennies worth.
Infantry AIT at Ft Benning they had my class perform automatic rifle fire qualifications multiple times with and with sling. with and without bi-pod. My rifle was an XM-16E1
We need another Pick One Scenario! I know that’s Henry & Josh’s thing but I’m tasking BOTR with this assignment 😉 Perhaps a Korean War scenario… A 3 RAR soldier was separated from his unit and has a lengthy trek back to friendly lines… he must choose between the following: 1} Having lost his rifle, he can pick up another No.1 MK III (after the lengthy battle he’s low on ammo but may find more if he spends time looking) and a pistol/revolver off a dead officer (not 1911 or HP35). 2} He can pick up an enemy PPSh-41 with a mostly full drum and plenty of 35rd mags
Now I wonder if sling firing affects POI on other platforms. I expect a full fledged series in the future Bloke. :D Jokes aside, brilliant testing. I am quite surprised how much the sling affects it.
I think that just by looking at where a given sling attaches, and how many degrees of separation those points are from the barrel, you could probably draw a reasonable conclusion for any given platform. Anything with a non-free floated fore is pretty much a sure bet, assuming your attachment point is on the fore.
Could you do more content and analysis with this rifle in general? It seems everyone else on TH-cam who has a retro AR treats it only as a mild curiosity and doesn’t give it a fair shake as a practical tool.
I've done a fair bit already (if you use the search function you'll find it), but it's a much maligned rifle (probably due to shagged out army ones back in the day) and really very, very good indeed and will be featuring muchly on the channel in future too.
Practical inasmuch as any civilian rifle can be considered practical for purposes other than target or hunting use. Not disparaging owning such rifles, I certainly do, but let’s not delude ourselves as to what they’re really for: Shooting at targets. Because that is a fun and worthwhile pastime.
Interesting, I had always wondered if the barrel mounted sight would help compensate. Though thinking about how a cantilevered beam flexes, the mininal compensation makes sense. I'd like to see this repeated with BUIS on the WWSD, and also with a PEQ-15 or similar. I've never been particularly pleased with the stiffness of the cheap-ish free float tubes I have on my rifles. But I know it doesn't matter for receiver mounted optics.
In US Army Basic Training with the M16A1, 1972 Ft. Polk, LA we were taught NEVER to use the magazine as a support. Of course we only had 20 rd magazines issued, with less ammo than capacity. We were shooting from a piece of concrete drain pipe about 1.5 meters in diameter and zeroing at 25 meters on the "Canadian Bull" target. Geoff Who was a young soldier born in the first half of the last century.
GI mags don't have any kind of overinsertion stop, so if you push too hard it can interfere with the bolt. Gen3 PMAGs have a lump on the back to prevent that.
I qualified with both the M16A1 and A2 in the USMC. On the Marine Corps KD (known distance) range we fired out to 500 yards using only iron sights. In all my years, I only missed 1 shot at the 500. Sling use, body position (natural point of aim), breath and trigger control, and of course sight alignment were absolutely critical at the 500 line. I believe the way the sling was utilized at the 500 pulled it into the hand in such a way that it didn’t distort the barrel enough to matter. When the Marine Corps went to the A2 around ‘85, they found that the scores went up. We felt the sights and trigger were better on the A2. The different stock length and fore-grip probably factored in as well. Not to mention the A2s were new and most of the A1s (at the time we had them, were up to 13 years old. Of course, the A2 had a heavier barrel and flash suppressor.
I think the fact your A1's were shagged out and the A2's were new will have had the biggest impact. The A2's barrel is just as skinny under the handguards as an A1 barrel though.
@@BlokeontheRange I heard the main benefit of the Government profile barrel was since it was thicker in the front, it added extra weight towards the end which fatigues your hand faster but settles the gun into the support hand more in a more stable fashion as well as reduce some muzzle climb and felt recoil, so that may be why that barrel profile worked better at distance shooting like this. That’s just what I heard some other people claim, though. Don’t know if it’s true.
@@BlokeontheRange Less of the barrel is skinny. That likely equates to less flexibility. The Marine Corps armorers actually watch the rifling and other tolerances pretty well. We had to keep track of all rounds fired, both live and blanks, and report them to the armory (we kept track of that in little notebooks). The sights on the A2 were definitely easier to adjust and use. In addition, we felt the 3 burst cam trigger was better (firing semi) than the trigger on the A1 firing semi. I purchased a Colt Sporter Target Model nib way back in 1989. It's a phenomenal shooting rifle. Have never done anything to modify it.
Aside from a trivial transition to the thicker gasblock area, the A1 and A2 barrels are exactly the same where it matters. What happens forward of the gasblock is irrelevant cos it's in front of the point of loading (whether by the sling or a clip on bipod) i.imgur.com/LDn4k0d.jpg
@@BlokeontheRange Actually, the A2 barrel is slightly thicker. Would be hard to tell by just looking but it makes a difference with stiffness, The M16A1 barrel is 0.675" tapering down to 0.600" behind the front sight, 0.625" under the front sight, and 0.575" in front of the front sight. The M16A2 barrel is 0.675" tapering down to 0.630" behind the front sight, 0.730" under the front sight, and 0.715" in front of the front sight.
I had no idea the sling could have any impact at all. Very curious to see the rest of the video. Yes I’m commenting at 2:43 into the video so I don’t forget to do so. Algorithm.
My bet is that it gets significantly worse with the scope - because the front sight movement should be compensating for the barrel movement to a degree.
I was taught to shoot wearing the notorious L85 3 point sling (which I actually like) which is entirely superfluous to looping up. With the L1A1 that proceeded it many rifle companies forbade the fitting of slings altogether. I have always shot unsupported as s result.
Pencil barrel or no, a hasty sling is going to pull the barrel off target if the forward sling point is attached to the barrel. It does not take much pressure to push a barrel around.
Algorithms comment. Retro rifles are cool. Brownells. 20” barrels are underrated. A single .45 round is better than a single 9mm round. My go to is a Glock but I love my 1911. AKs are more accurate than they get credit for. “Every gun is always loaded.” I’ve used a forward assist for what it was meant to be used for in adverse conditions… with blanks. J frame, Swiss Army knife, flashlight, chapstick. Research flat earth. I have no interest in an AR pistols. I like that pink sling on the WWSD rifle. Thanks for the video
When I shoot an AR (M16A1) I like to make a fist with the left hand and rest the rifle on the fist, allowing the rifle to rest with little pressure on the barrel in the prone position. I zero the rifle with a bag under the forearm as close to the mag well as I can. I try to never use the sling in match shooting with an A1. If you can, make more videos with the M16A1.
Placing my bet: You will see an increased shift because your scope isn't "following" the movement of the barrel like ironsights will. Think about it: Common logic is barrel bends up, the point of impact goes up. Common logic also says front sight post goes up, point of impact goes down. If front sight goes up because barrel is bending up, there is some cancelling effect. If you use a scope, the effect of barrel bending doesn't move your sighting system, so you get to see the effect of barrel bending without any cancelling
Wish I had a job when the Retro rifles and carbines came out because I would have gotten 1 of each type. Very good video Bloke. What was Chap shooting beside you that day?
It will change POI. Geoff Who notes the bipod was issued to "Auto riflemen" who also got 7 30-rd magazines, instead of 20-rd magazines, in 1973, US Army, Ft. Hood, Texas.
I'm placing my bet, now! However, the premise of the experiment is quite interesting. Barrel flexes, sight block moves, rear aperture stays fixed, why is this not a self-correcting situation? Hmmm, very intriguing.
I'm a bit surprised at this. I thought there would be far more deflection with the scope than with irons. I really notice this on my 1903A3. When I was shooting vintage bolt action matches I used a very loose sling because of an extreme variance in impact. The M1 seemed to be mostly unaffected by sling pressure.
There's no contact between the forend and the barrel on an M1. If it wasn't for the front handguard hanging off the front, I think you could legit call it a free float.
My bet is worse with the scope. When the barrel is distorted by the bipod/sling the FSB will shift with it and mitigate some of the shift. When you shift the barrel but retain the same hold as you’ll do with the scope then the change will be slightly more drastic. That’s my hypothesis
How's the cheek weld with the optical sight mounted on top of the already raised sights? I don't presume the AR15/M16's sights are too high, they have to be high with the straight line stock.
It's a little high, but nothing to worry about. Have a look at Chappie's FAMAS with an optic, he's hardly even getting his chin on it (see either Lynx Brutality or Finnish Brutality 2022 vids)
After shooting bubba-d SKS rifles, I would have thought there would be a bigger advantage to irons. I was always more successful with scoring hits with irons vs scopes on extended duration range sessions, but I guess it had more to do with the garbage dust cover scope mounts than I believed.
M16A2 rifle training wasn't much of a thing in the unit I was in when I was in the US Army. Being in a light infantry 12B (combat engineer) unit as a support person, there wasn't much of a need for this skill. My skill was to drive the company's lone 5-ton truck around with troops or supplies for the most part.
Hey have I question for you, I received a Swiss G1911 for Christmas and it was accurate and with PPU factory ammo the brass looked good, I reloaded this brass and upon my 2nd firing the primer backed out a little. In Switzerland is it a common problem to have excessive headspace in the older swiss action or do you think it is likely just my resizer bumping the shoulder back too far? I can't find any headspace gauges so I'm trying to figure out if it is even a concern. Thank you
Nobody really gives much of a damn about headspace outside of the US. It's certainly not obsessively checked like in the US. It's probably your resizer bumping the shoulder back too far indeed if it went fine with factory ammo.
@@BlokeontheRange awesome thank you. I also am looking forward to the rest of your swiss rifle series and would enjoy seeing other videos on Swiss rifle accessories/ military gear.
Add to your testing: sling pressure and bipod on WWSD free float tube with tube (not barrel) mounted irons. Bet it’ll be the same. It’s amazing how rare you see properly iron sighted ARs (free float tube with front sight on barrel all the way at the end) Why didn’t they use another FSB all the way at the end like an AK. They gave up 40% more sight radius and it’s quite terrible with M4 carbines the front sight is way too close!
I'm planning that with the WWSD already. I've got a 20" HBAR with a front sight block out as far as possible, and to be honest the extra sight radius isn't all that in practice... In principle, the M16 is capable of firing 22mm rifle grenades, which is a good reason to have the front sight where it is. Plus cost.
I don't like using a 30 round magazine as a restful I shoot. From the bench I prefer a 10 round magazine and rest on a bipod or sandbags or bags of lead shot.
Great video. On a barricade, does the shift change much with different resting points along the hand guard (with your hand in between or a sandbag)? Would a bipod closer to the mag reduce loaded poi shift to matter?
@@BlokeontheRange I thought so too with less leverage, but somewhere in my head lingers there was some negative point having the bipod close to the barrel extension. The first time I saw that shoddy bipod I thought why not there and fold the legs into recesses on a different handguard? I get that furthe forward allows smaller movement but with that downside in poi shift it might make sense.
I was expecting that using the mag as monopod would be best and equal on both rifles(free float barrel or not) but that wasn't the question or tested. How is it that using the sling is such a big part of the camp perry shooting if it causes distortion, especially back when using M1 or springfields? Thanks for real world testing and results! Theory needs verification to be fact!
You set your sights taking into account the distortion, and you need to practice having the sling tension very constant. Using the sling on the SLR was a part of competition shooting in the British Army too, and the pamphlet said that the rifle was NOT to be zeroed (implicitly for normal use) using the sling.
Well now you see why free floating a barrel is a must have beyond 300 meters. Id say even at 300 meters, you want it to be free floating. So yeah, sling supported, bipod rested, or mag supported, it should not matter anymore then. Maybe when mag supporting, you can grip the rifle with your left hand on the mag well. That could make a difference in how stable you are. Greetings, Jeff
Holding the magwell is ergonomic suckitude, and also, given that there's play between upper and lower, you're not holding the actual bit with the barrel and sights on it and it's free to wobble about.
@@BlokeontheRange Yes but you are not holding the barrel so you are not pushing it around. And for the holding on to the gun part. The magwell holding with the left hand can give a stable platform to shoot from. I really cant see how much the upper and lower would would "wobble" it is pinned in place, it should be rather tight. Also when you are not touching the barrel there is no changing of the POI (point of impact). Anyhow, good luck with shooting. I have to out an shoot more, but i first have to find a good range... Greetings, Jeff
You've never noticed wobble between upper and lower on an AR15? It's rare to find one that doesn't if you've not used an Accuwedge, tape or similar to take it out (it doesn't matter in practice if you're holding the forend)
If you're looking for a video idea, try shooting some SS109 through your M16A1. If you look at the paperwork that was produced back then, they took into account that it should work in 1/12 barrels, in fact I've read stuff where they said it was more accurate. If you work it out mathematically, a 1/11 twist is optimal for a bullet that length. I used to do it through my SP1 no problem, but everyone is under this impression you need a stupidly fast twist. The M196 tracer bullet is longer than the M855 bullet, no one says you can't shoot that through a 1/12 twist. I was using shitty RORG ammo back in the day, try it with something decent like MEN. That would be an interesting video.
@@BlokeontheRange Is it illegal? Oops. Not that I tried it myself (couldn't see the point seeing as they were giving us lovely GP90) but I know someone who brought his ammo with him and that was SS109. I just thought it wasn't allowed on certain ranges because of the penetration issue. The GP90 bullet is 21.5mm or somewhere around there, so it's slightly shorter and the Swiss decided on 1/10. Sierra Matchking 69gr HPBT is 22.9mm and the M855 bullet is 23mm. Sierra recommend a 1/10 twist. At the altitude you're at, that's going to make a difference but if you tried it with Sierra MK on a warm day that might show up something interesting. The problem using AMS is that you can't see if the bullet is wobbling when it hits the target. The M196 tracer bullet is 23.1mm, so... I think part of the problem is that people use the wrong formula, the uncorrected formula was designed for bullets travelling at less than 3,000 fps, but the corrected formula indicates that 1/11 is correct for a 23mm long bullet.
It wont stabilize SS109 due to the twist not being fast enough to compensate for the steel penetrator not being perfectly centered in each projectile. You need at least a 1 in 9 twist for SS109 due to its design making it want to wobble. This is a good example of what works on paper, not working in the field due to a confounding variable.
@@takingbacktoxic7898 it will stabilize SS109, I've got plenty of practical experience with it. I suppose it depends on the brand as to how consistent the bullets are, but SS109 was specifically designed to work with a 1/12 twist. And bear in mind M196 tracer has a tracer element in it, and is also a longer bullet that is less aerodynamic. And that was clearly designed for 1/12.
This is nothing new. We were told this when the M16A1 was issued. Many of us had been trained in the M14/M1 where the sling improved accuracy. So, I did not use the bipod (except in instances to keep the rifle out of the mud and no dry sandbags were available). The sling was primarily used to sling it to your shoulder. Later, when I obtained the 3x Colt scope, if I was using the scope, I would hold/brace the rifle nearer the receiver. It would do the job if you did yours. Remember, PRACTICAL accuracy. It was more a KISS rifle than the later A2 (less attention to field use than a range rifle). By the way, look at the scope height with this scope. Later people would remove the handle then try to imitate the sight/scope height. Go figure on regressive thinking. The "return to zero" Colt scopes had it right. Thanks for the video.
Correct. We were told about the shift when we trained on the gun. I had trained on the M14 and then the 16 before going to RVN. The sling on our 16’s was the same web sling found on the M14. It was only used to carry the rifle, many just removed theirs. I never saw a bipod or a scope in country and you never rested the rifle on the magazine. I arrived in country in 1970. My rifle always worked. It was a light, compact, and reasonably accurate rifle. Coming home I bought an SP1 which I still have. I shoot it once a year just for fun. I never witnessed the problems that happen earlier. By 1970 the powder problem had been solved. BTW, love your videos. Thanks
I see your semi-auto converted M16A1 still has the third hole for the auto sear. Can you explain how Swiss law deals with these issues compared to the U.S.?
You can literally just pop the auto sear out and fit a semi selector and you're cool. I went further and had the 3rd pin holes drilled and tapped for 4mm grub screws to go a bit above and beyond.
Depends on your canton with silencers. Mine will give them out willy nilly for the permit fee (about $150 for up to 3 at the same time from the same seller).
I predict that the point of impact shift with and without the scope will be similar, but I have NO IDEA what I am talking about. I'm just posting a low-quality comment to feed the TH-cam algorithm.
what I like about your videos, is the same as I like forgotten weapons videos fore... its always well supported with facts.. you fell you either learn something or get a teori confirmed/unconfirmed
Pushing the barrel up pushes the point of impact up. Pushing the front sight up pushes the point of impact down (rear sight away from the error, front sight into the error for correction). And vice versa. The question was whether this was noticable.
@@BlokeontheRange ok I thought that... But I wasn't sure. It feels counter intuitive... Cause for the A1 the sight is pushed up with the barrel. So they both go up ... And I couldn't figure out in my head what it looks like if u push the front sight up. For some reason
I was trained on the M16A2 and we were taught to use the sling in two ways. It’s was always a struggle to get the same tension between shots. Thank you for the wonderful videos.
Mm using a sling requires a lot of training
I shot a Colt Sp1 and Army M-16 in competition in the late seventies and eighties. I learned early on that the best sling tension was to go as light as possible on those rifles. I did manage to make NRA Expert with the SP1 and handloads. Six hundred yards was a royal tussle, but it could be kept inside the scoring rings.
The fact that the sling had such a significant impact was certainly surprising to me. Thanks for another interesting video!
Makes sense why CMP National Match A2s have free float tubes.
Got one on my Windham Weaponry A1ish (it’s not a true A1), and it works well at letting me apply sling tension without shifting zero.
Wow, very interesting result
Thank you. Another excellent video. The M16 rifle was designed to kill people i.e., not rabbits or corvids; at several hundred metres. Sufficiently accurate for the former task. The lighter weight of the M16A1 was nice, compared to the SLR L1A1; but field stripping/reassembly and cleaning were all quicker and easier with the latter. The pressed metal bipod was ideal for keeping an M16 or SLR off the ground whilst having a rest, digging a shell scrape, setting up your hutchie (shelter-half) or cooking a meal, etc.
I only ever shoot a standard (SRa) No1/No4 freehand or off "supported hand", even in competitions where slings are permitted - because of the MPI change when other forms of support are used. For target (SRb) No1/No4 I zero for the one type of sling and position. Bipods on a military bolt action (ie wood bedded) are hopeless, delivering very variable MPI, but some people persist in using them and then complaining that the rifle won't hold zero.
I was confirming zero with my ps90 last year. I was in a hurry and rested the barrel on a wooden rest. I was surprised how much the shift was at 100 yards. Diving into the hasty sling shift with optic was cool too. Thanks!
I'll put my money on it being worse with the scope, but this feels like one of those trick questions!
I have a Colt AR15-A4 that currently has a Knight's Armament M5 RAS and topped with an ACOG 4x32. I have experienced a tremendous amount of barrel flex with this set up, especially in the Arizona summer heat. When shooting prone and resting the rifle towards the front sight post area, I can get about 6" to 8" of upward flex at 100 meters with 62 grain M855/SS109 loads. Just as you demonstrated. At 300 meters I need to use my 100 meter main sight because the 300 meter BDC sends the bullet way over the target. As a result, I've decided to free float the barrel with a Geissele Mk8 15" rail. I hope this will fix the issue. Great video.
Good video and good shooting Bloke. I'm honestly surprised the impact wasnt that big on the pencil barrel. My A2 barrel, will have enough deflection to require adjustment of the sights, especially at 600 yards, pending my shooting position or technique. Using the sling as a shooters sling with high tension really shows the barrel flex. Consistency is key when doing precision. Even my bolt action, wooden stock rifle, will have different POI pending sling tension due to recoil differences at long range, although much less pronounced than a non-floated AR.
Under the handguard, an A1 and A2 barrel have the same profile :)
@@BlokeontheRange I hesitated getting into ARs for a long time due to the reverse barrel taper seriously triggering my engineering OCD.
getting away from government profile and HBAR is a relatively recent phenomenon.
@@3of11 What? You don't like adding useless weight exactly at the area that it isn't needed? Looks like you'd never make it working in the government.
It could be minimal barrel movement, but, at 300 I could see a small deviation in position making a potential sizable difference in point of impact. Just my two pennies worth.
American sling tension guideline: that little bit of tingle where circulation is just being cut off
Infantry AIT at Ft Benning they had my class perform automatic rifle fire qualifications multiple times with and with sling. with and without bi-pod.
My rifle was an XM-16E1
We need another Pick One Scenario!
I know that’s Henry & Josh’s thing but I’m tasking BOTR with this assignment 😉
Perhaps a Korean War scenario… A 3 RAR soldier was separated from his unit and has a lengthy trek back to friendly lines… he must choose between the following:
1} Having lost his rifle, he can pick up another No.1 MK III (after the lengthy battle he’s low on ammo but may find more if he spends time looking) and a pistol/revolver off a dead officer (not 1911 or HP35).
2} He can pick up an enemy PPSh-41 with a mostly full drum and plenty of 35rd mags
I was wrong. I thought it would be a bigger difference than what it is. Your video are always fascinating.
Don't you just love it when Imperial and Metric units are mixed together.
Ask the Beagle engineers!
Now I wonder if sling firing affects POI on other platforms.
I expect a full fledged series in the future Bloke. :D
Jokes aside, brilliant testing. I am quite surprised how much the sling affects it.
I think that just by looking at where a given sling attaches, and how many degrees of separation those points are from the barrel, you could probably draw a reasonable conclusion for any given platform. Anything with a non-free floated fore is pretty much a sure bet, assuming your attachment point is on the fore.
I moved my POI about 10 inches at 100 yards with a Mini-30 (note that mini-30s don't share the slim barrel of the old Mini-14s).
Excellent vid, Bloke. I love your simple investigatory work like this, it answers some real, albeit somewhat niche, questions a lot of folks have
Wonderful example of the benefits of free floating.
Could you do more content and analysis with this rifle in general? It seems everyone else on TH-cam who has a retro AR treats it only as a mild curiosity and doesn’t give it a fair shake as a practical tool.
I've done a fair bit already (if you use the search function you'll find it), but it's a much maligned rifle (probably due to shagged out army ones back in the day) and really very, very good indeed and will be featuring muchly on the channel in future too.
Practical inasmuch as any civilian rifle can be considered practical for purposes other than target or hunting use.
Not disparaging owning such rifles, I certainly do, but let’s not delude ourselves as to what they’re really for: Shooting at targets. Because that is a fun and worthwhile pastime.
Interesting, I had always wondered if the barrel mounted sight would help compensate. Though thinking about how a cantilevered beam flexes, the mininal compensation makes sense.
I'd like to see this repeated with BUIS on the WWSD, and also with a PEQ-15 or similar. I've never been particularly pleased with the stiffness of the cheap-ish free float tubes I have on my rifles. But I know it doesn't matter for receiver mounted optics.
In US Army Basic Training with the M16A1, 1972 Ft. Polk, LA we were taught NEVER to use the magazine as a support. Of course we only had 20 rd magazines issued, with less ammo than capacity. We were shooting from a piece of concrete drain pipe about 1.5 meters in diameter and zeroing at 25 meters on the "Canadian Bull" target. Geoff Who was a young soldier born in the first half of the last century.
GI mags don't have any kind of overinsertion stop, so if you push too hard it can interfere with the bolt. Gen3 PMAGs have a lump on the back to prevent that.
I qualified with both the M16A1 and A2 in the USMC. On the Marine Corps KD (known distance) range we fired out to 500 yards using only iron sights. In all my years, I only missed 1 shot at the 500. Sling use, body position (natural point of aim), breath and trigger control, and of course sight alignment were absolutely critical at the 500 line. I believe the way the sling was utilized at the 500 pulled it into the hand in such a way that it didn’t distort the barrel enough to matter. When the Marine Corps went to the A2 around ‘85, they found that the scores went up. We felt the sights and trigger were better on the A2. The different stock length and fore-grip probably factored in as well. Not to mention the A2s were new and most of the A1s (at the time we had them, were up to 13 years old. Of course, the A2 had a heavier barrel and flash suppressor.
I think the fact your A1's were shagged out and the A2's were new will have had the biggest impact. The A2's barrel is just as skinny under the handguards as an A1 barrel though.
@@BlokeontheRange I heard the main benefit of the Government profile barrel was since it was thicker in the front, it added extra weight towards the end which fatigues your hand faster but settles the gun into the support hand more in a more stable fashion as well as reduce some muzzle climb and felt recoil, so that may be why that barrel profile worked better at distance shooting like this.
That’s just what I heard some other people claim, though. Don’t know if it’s true.
@@BlokeontheRange Less of the barrel is skinny. That likely equates to less flexibility. The Marine Corps armorers actually watch the rifling and other tolerances pretty well. We had to keep track of all rounds fired, both live and blanks, and report them to the armory (we kept track of that in little notebooks). The sights on the A2 were definitely easier to adjust and use. In addition, we felt the 3 burst cam trigger was better (firing semi) than the trigger on the A1 firing semi. I purchased a Colt Sporter Target Model nib way back in 1989. It's a phenomenal shooting rifle. Have never done anything to modify it.
Aside from a trivial transition to the thicker gasblock area, the A1 and A2 barrels are exactly the same where it matters. What happens forward of the gasblock is irrelevant cos it's in front of the point of loading (whether by the sling or a clip on bipod)
i.imgur.com/LDn4k0d.jpg
@@BlokeontheRange Actually, the A2 barrel is slightly thicker. Would be hard to tell by just looking but it makes a difference with stiffness, The M16A1 barrel is 0.675" tapering down to 0.600" behind the front sight, 0.625" under the front sight, and 0.575" in front of the front sight. The M16A2 barrel is 0.675" tapering down to 0.630" behind the front sight, 0.730" under the front sight, and 0.715" in front of the front sight.
I had no idea the sling could have any impact at all. Very curious to see the rest of the video. Yes I’m commenting at 2:43 into the video so I don’t forget to do so. Algorithm.
My bet is that it gets significantly worse with the scope - because the front sight movement should be compensating for the barrel movement to a degree.
But I was wrong. TIL
Interesting. My bet was the scope having a greater variation. Also, nice shooting!
I was taught to shoot wearing the notorious L85 3 point sling (which I actually like) which is entirely superfluous to looping up. With the L1A1 that proceeded it many rifle companies forbade the fitting of slings altogether. I have always shot unsupported as s result.
Amazing that just wrapping the sling around your arm has such an effect. Maybe the pencil barrels are a bit too pencil?
The A2 barrel is just as slender from the gasblock rearwards :)
@@BlokeontheRange correct, my A2 barrel goes all over the damn place with the sling too.
Pencil barrel or no, a hasty sling is going to pull the barrel off target if the forward sling point is attached to the barrel. It does not take much pressure to push a barrel around.
I'd like to see a retromod A1 with Criterion CORE barrel tested the same.
Algorithms comment. Retro rifles are cool. Brownells. 20” barrels are underrated. A single .45 round is better than a single 9mm round. My go to is a Glock but I love my 1911. AKs are more accurate than they get credit for. “Every gun is always loaded.” I’ve used a forward assist for what it was meant to be used for in adverse conditions… with blanks. J frame, Swiss Army knife, flashlight, chapstick. Research flat earth. I have no interest in an AR pistols. I like that pink sling on the WWSD rifle. Thanks for the video
I had no idea I would be so interested in the results! ;-)
Lasers. Laser at the end of the barrel, laser at the carry handle. Laser at the grip. Lasers everywhere!!
Always enjoy your insight.
Great video, thanks 🪖🇺🇸🇬🇧
When I shoot an AR (M16A1) I like to make a fist with the left hand and rest the rifle on the fist, allowing the rifle to rest with little pressure on the barrel in the prone position. I zero the rifle with a bag under the forearm as close to the mag well as I can. I try to never use the sling in match shooting with an A1.
If you can, make more videos with the M16A1.
Placing my bet:
You will see an increased shift because your scope isn't "following" the movement of the barrel like ironsights will.
Think about it:
Common logic is barrel bends up, the point of impact goes up. Common logic also says front sight post goes up, point of impact goes down. If front sight goes up because barrel is bending up, there is some cancelling effect. If you use a scope, the effect of barrel bending doesn't move your sighting system, so you get to see the effect of barrel bending without any cancelling
Nice video, I was curious about this but hadn’t gone through the trouble of measuring the difference.
Super interesting. My bet is it’s going to be very significant
Great and very interesting video. Thank you!
What's Chap shooting @ 3:17? I see a stacking swivel and a front sight which I can't recognize.
I didn't know these facts, thanks!
Wish I had a job when the Retro rifles and carbines came out because I would have gotten 1 of each type. Very good video Bloke. What was Chap shooting beside you that day?
Interesting stuff, Mike. The Banzai clips are dating us both though. LOL!
Love the channel
It will change POI. Geoff Who notes the bipod was issued to "Auto riflemen" who also got 7 30-rd magazines, instead of 20-rd magazines, in 1973, US Army, Ft. Hood, Texas.
"Mixed measurements speak to me" Me too, brother. Firkins per fortnight should be the standard.
Just saying... That sling on the Stoner2021 is FABULOUS!!!
Isn't it just? :D
WWSD2020's sling was stolen from some drapery? ;-P love the data you always provide.
I'm placing my bet, now! However, the premise of the experiment is quite interesting. Barrel flexes, sight block moves, rear aperture stays fixed, why is this not a self-correcting situation? Hmmm, very intriguing.
You should have used the pink sling. Then all the groups would have been better🙂
Really neat and thorough comparison! I wonder what mag resting with magwell grip would have done?
I have no bet, but here is some well earnt algo-fodder
Very interesting, thank for posting
Never th9ught about that, but.... makes sense and data backs it up.
*this post for engagement of the algorithm*
PS: (Possibly) meaningful commentary later when I have watched the video.
Liking Chappie in the background. I get a slight vibe-of-distain for the "airsoft noises" coming from his right while he's on a proper gun.
it all depends on the force you are applying one way or other but the point of impact surely will change
I'm a bit surprised at this. I thought there would be far more deflection with the scope than with irons. I really notice this on my 1903A3. When I was shooting vintage bolt action matches I used a very loose sling because of an extreme variance in impact. The M1 seemed to be mostly unaffected by sling pressure.
There's no contact between the forend and the barrel on an M1. If it wasn't for the front handguard hanging off the front, I think you could legit call it a free float.
My bet is worse with the scope. When the barrel is distorted by the bipod/sling the FSB will shift with it and mitigate some of the shift. When you shift the barrel but retain the same hold as you’ll do with the scope then the change will be slightly more drastic. That’s my hypothesis
I prefer iron sights with the early handle upper and a nice Elcan scope on a flat top receiver. I find that the Elcan is worth every penny
How's the cheek weld with the optical sight mounted on top of the already raised sights?
I don't presume the AR15/M16's sights are too high, they have to be high with the straight line stock.
It's a little high, but nothing to worry about. Have a look at Chappie's FAMAS with an optic, he's hardly even getting his chin on it (see either Lynx Brutality or Finnish Brutality 2022 vids)
After shooting bubba-d SKS rifles, I would have thought there would be a bigger advantage to irons. I was always more successful with scoring hits with irons vs scopes on extended duration range sessions, but I guess it had more to do with the garbage dust cover scope mounts than I believed.
SKS dust covers won't even remotely hold zero, so yes.
Very interesting. Lewis gun next ?
What's Chap shooting there?
M16A2 rifle training wasn't much of a thing in the unit I was in when I was in the US Army. Being in a light infantry 12B (combat engineer) unit as a support person, there wasn't much of a need for this skill. My skill was to drive the company's lone 5-ton truck around with troops or supplies for the most part.
I LOVE 20" carry handle ARs... I have a 1972 Colt SP1 in 98% that is a babied range toy...
Hey have I question for you, I received a Swiss G1911 for Christmas and it was accurate and with PPU factory ammo the brass looked good, I reloaded this brass and upon my 2nd firing the primer backed out a little. In Switzerland is it a common problem to have excessive headspace in the older swiss action or do you think it is likely just my resizer bumping the shoulder back too far?
I can't find any headspace gauges so I'm trying to figure out if it is even a concern. Thank you
Nobody really gives much of a damn about headspace outside of the US. It's certainly not obsessively checked like in the US.
It's probably your resizer bumping the shoulder back too far indeed if it went fine with factory ammo.
@@BlokeontheRange awesome thank you. I also am looking forward to the rest of your swiss rifle series and would enjoy seeing other videos on Swiss rifle accessories/ military gear.
Add to your testing: sling pressure and bipod on WWSD free float tube with tube (not barrel) mounted irons. Bet it’ll be the same. It’s amazing how rare you see properly iron sighted ARs (free float tube with front sight on barrel all the way at the end)
Why didn’t they use another FSB all the way at the end like an AK. They gave up 40% more sight radius and it’s quite terrible with M4 carbines the front sight is way too close!
I'm planning that with the WWSD already. I've got a 20" HBAR with a front sight block out as far as possible, and to be honest the extra sight radius isn't all that in practice...
In principle, the M16 is capable of firing 22mm rifle grenades, which is a good reason to have the front sight where it is. Plus cost.
Good content
at what range are you at? i'd love to join along and i'll make sure to bring some fun sticks with me
Be interesting to see if the addition of a bayonet to the M16A1 makes a significant difference.
Just an excuse to get back out to the range.
Not only was the video interesting, but my bird brain was enthralled by that sling!
I don't like using a 30 round magazine as a restful I shoot.
From the bench I prefer a 10 round magazine and rest on a bipod or sandbags or bags of lead shot.
Take this, algorithm!
Interesting!
Great video. On a barricade, does the shift change much with different resting points along the hand guard (with your hand in between or a sandbag)? Would a bipod closer to the mag reduce loaded poi shift to matter?
The mechanics would suggest that the closer the bipod to the receiver, the less the deflection
@@BlokeontheRange
I thought so too with less leverage, but somewhere in my head lingers there was some negative point having the bipod close to the barrel extension. The first time I saw that shoddy bipod I thought why not there and fold the legs into recesses on a different handguard? I get that furthe forward allows smaller movement but with that downside in poi shift it might make sense.
I was expecting that using the mag as monopod would be best and equal on both rifles(free float barrel or not) but that wasn't the question or tested. How is it that using the sling is such a big part of the camp perry shooting if it causes distortion, especially back when using M1 or springfields? Thanks for real world testing and results! Theory needs verification to be fact!
You set your sights taking into account the distortion, and you need to practice having the sling tension very constant.
Using the sling on the SLR was a part of competition shooting in the British Army too, and the pamphlet said that the rifle was NOT to be zeroed (implicitly for normal use) using the sling.
Well now you see why free floating a barrel is a must have beyond 300 meters. Id say even at 300 meters, you want it to be free floating.
So yeah, sling supported, bipod rested, or mag supported, it should not matter anymore then.
Maybe when mag supporting, you can grip the rifle with your left hand on the mag well. That could make a difference in how stable you are.
Greetings,
Jeff
Holding the magwell is ergonomic suckitude, and also, given that there's play between upper and lower, you're not holding the actual bit with the barrel and sights on it and it's free to wobble about.
@@BlokeontheRange Yes but you are not holding the barrel so you are not pushing it around. And for the holding on to the gun part. The magwell holding with the left hand can give a stable platform to shoot from.
I really cant see how much the upper and lower would would "wobble" it is pinned in place, it should be rather tight. Also when you are not touching the barrel there is no changing of the POI (point of impact).
Anyhow, good luck with shooting. I have to out an shoot more, but i first have to find a good range...
Greetings,
Jeff
You've never noticed wobble between upper and lower on an AR15? It's rare to find one that doesn't if you've not used an Accuwedge, tape or similar to take it out (it doesn't matter in practice if you're holding the forend)
If you're looking for a video idea, try shooting some SS109 through your M16A1. If you look at the paperwork that was produced back then, they took into account that it should work in 1/12 barrels, in fact I've read stuff where they said it was more accurate. If you work it out mathematically, a 1/11 twist is optimal for a bullet that length. I used to do it through my SP1 no problem, but everyone is under this impression you need a stupidly fast twist. The M196 tracer bullet is longer than the M855 bullet, no one says you can't shoot that through a 1/12 twist. I was using shitty RORG ammo back in the day, try it with something decent like MEN. That would be an interesting video.
SS109 is illegal here unfortunately. I'd have to do it with FMJ.
Although looking at it, SS109 is much longer than FMJ so it won't be a comparison...
@@BlokeontheRange Is it illegal? Oops. Not that I tried it myself (couldn't see the point seeing as they were giving us lovely GP90) but I know someone who brought his ammo with him and that was SS109. I just thought it wasn't allowed on certain ranges because of the penetration issue. The GP90 bullet is 21.5mm or somewhere around there, so it's slightly shorter and the Swiss decided on 1/10. Sierra Matchking 69gr HPBT is 22.9mm and the M855 bullet is 23mm. Sierra recommend a 1/10 twist. At the altitude you're at, that's going to make a difference but if you tried it with Sierra MK on a warm day that might show up something interesting. The problem using AMS is that you can't see if the bullet is wobbling when it hits the target. The M196 tracer bullet is 23.1mm, so... I think part of the problem is that people use the wrong formula, the uncorrected formula was designed for bullets travelling at less than 3,000 fps, but the corrected formula indicates that 1/11 is correct for a 23mm long bullet.
It wont stabilize SS109 due to the twist not being fast enough to compensate for the steel penetrator not being perfectly centered in each projectile. You need at least a 1 in 9 twist for SS109 due to its design making it want to wobble.
This is a good example of what works on paper, not working in the field due to a confounding variable.
@@takingbacktoxic7898 it will stabilize SS109, I've got plenty of practical experience with it. I suppose it depends on the brand as to how consistent the bullets are, but SS109 was specifically designed to work with a 1/12 twist. And bear in mind M196 tracer has a tracer element in it, and is also a longer bullet that is less aerodynamic. And that was clearly designed for 1/12.
This is nothing new. We were told this when the M16A1 was issued. Many of us had been trained in the M14/M1 where the sling improved accuracy. So, I did not use the bipod (except in instances to keep the rifle out of the mud and no dry sandbags were available). The sling was primarily used to sling it to your shoulder. Later, when I obtained the 3x Colt scope, if I was using the scope, I would hold/brace the rifle nearer the receiver. It would do the job if you did yours. Remember, PRACTICAL accuracy. It was more a KISS rifle than the later A2 (less attention to field use than a range rifle). By the way, look at the scope height with this scope. Later people would remove the handle then try to imitate the sight/scope height. Go figure on regressive thinking. The "return to zero" Colt scopes had it right. Thanks for the video.
Correct. We were told about the shift when we trained on the gun. I had trained on the M14 and then the 16 before going to RVN. The sling on our 16’s was the same web sling found on the M14. It was only used to carry the rifle, many just removed theirs. I never saw a bipod or a scope in country and you never rested the rifle on the magazine. I arrived in country in 1970. My rifle always worked. It was a light, compact, and reasonably accurate rifle. Coming home I bought an SP1 which I still have. I shoot it once a year just for fun. I never witnessed the problems that happen earlier. By 1970 the powder problem had been solved. BTW, love your videos. Thanks
Leaving a comment for Al Gore's rhythm section.
I would have thought the impact would be the same
I have to say my intuition says there must be a grater impact with the scope than with irons.
I see your semi-auto converted M16A1 still has the third hole for the auto sear. Can you explain how Swiss law deals with these issues compared to the U.S.?
You can literally just pop the auto sear out and fit a semi selector and you're cool. I went further and had the 3rd pin holes drilled and tapped for 4mm grub screws to go a bit above and beyond.
@@BlokeontheRange Amazing! In some ways the Swiss have more latitude than we do. Especially with silencers it seems.
Depends on your canton with silencers. Mine will give them out willy nilly for the permit fee (about $150 for up to 3 at the same time from the same seller).
Awesome
"Magic Wand"... :-D
Yes. More impact shift with scope.
Bets in, not going to have any impact. Also what was Chap shooting next to you couldn't quite make it out
For the algorithm gods
I predict that the point of impact shift with and without the scope will be similar, but I have NO IDEA what I am talking about. I'm just posting a low-quality comment to feed the TH-cam algorithm.
what I like about your videos, is the same as I like forgotten weapons videos fore... its always well supported with facts.. you fell you either learn something or get a teori confirmed/unconfirmed
Yeah. It makes sense... I bet it did happen
I’m not sure why you say it’s not significant, when the rounds are going right over the head of your target
Could you try it on a 500yards target?
Nope, sorry, don't have access to a 500 yard or metre range.
I would like to see the lack of variation in the group with the bipod and sling with the WWSD rifle.
You'll never guess what I'm planning :)
Wait... I don't get it... Would what compensate... They both are pushing the barrel and sight. Up... ? I'm feeling dumb... Why don't I get it
Pushing the barrel up pushes the point of impact up. Pushing the front sight up pushes the point of impact down (rear sight away from the error, front sight into the error for correction). And vice versa. The question was whether this was noticable.
@@BlokeontheRange ok I thought that... But I wasn't sure. It feels counter intuitive... Cause for the A1 the sight is pushed up with the barrel. So they both go up ... And I couldn't figure out in my head what it looks like if u push the front sight up. For some reason
Cool
i bet using irons will mitigate the issue, not solve it.
I think the irons will compensate
I think there will be a difference (2:51)